No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Towner County Living Ctr

228 1st Ave, Cando, ND 58324 · Non profit - Corporation · 28 certified beds · (701) 968-2600 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (701) 968-2600 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 13 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
524 4th Ave NE Ste 9 · (701) 662-7046 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
412 Main St · (701) 968-3531 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
315 Main St · (701) 968-3900 · Call to confirm hours
Park
4th Ave · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased11.0%19.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.0%5.8%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection5.6%2.6%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.0%4.4%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.7%5.1%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.4%17.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.6%17.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.3%4.9%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.9%24.9%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table17.0%22.7%17.1%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.001.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.601.861.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

0.09U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.05hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.09 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 5% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

1.45
RN hours/ resident / day
0.33
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.54
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.31
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.88
RN hoursweekends
50.0%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 28 beds and averages 27.4 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 1 bed typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.31 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.45 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.54 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.52 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.68 to 0.88 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-14)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-25)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-14 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — pattern
    Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of facility policy, review of resident council minutes, review of the facility assessment, review of the dietary schedule, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff for meal service in 1 of 1 dining room. Failure to serve resident meals in a timely manner did not enhance the dining experience for the facility's residents.Findings include:Review of facility policy titled Nutrition Services Staffing occurred on 01/14/26. This policy, revised 04/08/25, stated, . The department will be staffed adequately to meet the patient's nutritional needs with regular meals served to patient at 7:30am [morning], 11:45am and 5:30pm [evening]. The facility will provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the supportive functions of the Food and Nutrition Services. These functions include, but are not limited to: . Safe and timely meal preparation . Providing meals and/or supplements in accordance with residents' needs . Review of the resident council minutes occurred on all days of survey and showed the following:*…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-01-14 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of resident council meeting minutes, review of facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to take actions aimed at performance improvement and, after implementing those actions, measure its success, and track performance to ensure that improvements are identified and sustained. Failure to perform Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program (QAPI) for continued resident concerns placed all residents at risk for not having their needs met. Findings includeReview of policy, Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement Program occurred on 01/14/26. This undated policy stated, . the scope of the QAPI program encompasses all segments of TLCL ([NAME] County Living Center) including resident . feedback . Our organization will conduct Performance Improvement Projects [PIP] that are designed to take systemic approach to revise and improve care or services in the areas that we identify as needing attention. We will conduct PIPs (performance improvement…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of the facility reported incident (FRI) investigation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #4) investigated for a fall. Failure to ensure staff provided hands on assistance with ambulation resulted in a fall with injury to Resident #4 and has the potential for all residents who require hands on assistance with ambulation to experience falls and/or injury.Findings includeReview of the facility policy titled Fall Prevention Policy occurred on 01/14/26. This policy, dated 10/03/24, stated, . Each resident will be assessed for fall risk and will receive care and services in accordance with their individualized level of risk to minimize the likelihood of falls.Review of the FRI investigation, received from the facility on 03/19/25, stated, . RN [registered nurse] [#9] verbally reported CNA [#8] called her into the room and when she came in found [Resident 4] on the floor with a quarter size open flap…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of facility policies, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food is stored in accordance with professional standards for food service sanitation in 1 of 1 kitchen. Failure to ensure food is stored, prepared and served in a sanitary environment, and to ensure sanitary strips are not expired, may result in contamination of foods and foodborne illness. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Food Storage occurred on 01/14/26. This policy dated September 2010, stated, . The store room will be clean . Items stored under refrigeration that are ready to eat and potentially hazardous shall be marked with date prepared. Potentially hazardous [foods] like meats, spreads and salads will be kept for three days after date prepared . Other less hazardous foods like gelatin and canned fruit will be kept five days after date opened. Food must be stored sufficiently above floor level . 6-12 off the floor . Lighting, ventilation and humidity should be controlled to meet requirements and prevent both condensation and the growth of microorganisms.…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow standards of infection control and prevention for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #3) observed during cares. Failure to apply appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing care to residents in enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) has the potential to spread infection to residents, staff and visitors. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control-Enhanced Based Precautions occurred on 01/14/25. This policy, revised September 2025, stated, . Enhanced Barrier Precautions require the use of gowns and gloves . For residents for whom enhanced Barrier Precautions are indicated, Enhanced barrier Precautions is employed the preforming resident care activities: . Transferring. Changing briefs or assisting with toileting . Review of Resident #3's medical record occurred on all days of survey. A physician's order dated, 06/26/24, stated Enhanced Barrier Precautions due to indwelling catheter - G-Tube [feeding tube] Observation on…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-25 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to serve beverages at palatable temperatures in 1 of 2 meals observed. Failure to serve foods at palatable temperatures to residents may result in decreased intake, weight loss, and inadequate nutrition. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Food Storage occurred on 09/24/24. This undated policy, stated, .Purpose: to store food under sanitary conditions to protect it from contamination and outdating . 11. dairy products . must be stored at temperatures between 33-40 degrees Fahrenheit . During an interview on 09/23/24 at 2:15 p.m., Resident A stated, The cold drinks are warm. Observation of the breakfast meal occurred on 09/24/24 at 8:38 a.m. showed staff served residents their milk from three half gallon cartons sitting in a pan of water. Temperatures obtained showed the following: * Whole milk at 50 degrees Fahrenheit * 2% milk at 49 degrees Fahrenheit * Chocolate milk at 60 degrees Fahrenheit During an interview on 09/24/24 at 08:56 a.m., a dietary staff (#3)…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate labeling of medications for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #22) with a gastrostomy tube (G-tube)observed during medication pass. Failure to ensure appropriate labeling of medications placed residents at risk for medication errors and/or injury. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Labeling of Medications occurred on 09/24/24. This policy, dated July 2024, stated, . 1. All medications will be labeled in accordance with applicable federal and state requirements and current accepted pharmaceutical principals and practices . 2. Labels for individual drug containers must include: . i. The route of administration . 10. The pharmacy must be informed of any order changes or changes in directions for the use of the medications . - Review of Resident #22's medical record occurred on all days of survey and included a physician's order to administer medications via G-tube. - Observation during medication pass on 09/24/24 at 2:49 p.m. showed a staff…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-09-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the consultant pharmacist completed and reported the drug regimen reviews at least monthly for 5 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #2, #5, #6, #7, and #16) selected for unnecessary medication review. Failure to complete and report drug regimen reviews may result in residents receiving unnecessary medications and experiencing adverse consequences related to the medications. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Pharmacy Monthly Medication Review of LTC [Long Term Care] Residents occurred on 09/07/23. This undated policy, stated, . Review new orders since the last month's review. Scan medication profile/Physician Order Sheet for compliance with the DRUG REGIMEN REVIEW GUIDELINES (DRR). Review of Residents #2, #5, #6, #7, and #16's medical records occurred on all days of survey. The record identified the most recent drug regimen reviews dated as follows: * Resident #2 - 05/31/23 * Resident #5 - 03/31/23 * Resident #6 - 04/30/23 * Resident #7 - 03/31/23 * Resident #16 -…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, review of the North Dakota Provider Manual for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) and Level of Care Screening Procedures for Long Term Care Services, and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a status change assessment for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #7) reviewed for PASRR. Failure to complete a change in status assessment with a newly diagnosed mental illness and/or change in treatment may result in the delivery of care and services that are inconsistent with residents' needs. Findings include: The North Dakota PASRR Provider Manual, revised December 2020, page 13, states, . Change in Status Process: Whenever the following events occur, nursing facility staff must contact [the contracted agency] to update the Level I screen for determination of whether a first time or updated Level II evaluation must be performed. These situations suggest that a significant change in status has occurred: . If an individual with MI, ID, and/or RC [mental illness, intellectual disability, and conditions related to intellectual disability…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan to reflect the current status for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident #4). Failure to review and revise the care plan limited staffs' ability to communicate needs and ensure continuity of care. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Care Plan occurred on 09/07/23. This policy, dated 08/16/18, stated, . the care plan will include measurable objectives and timetables to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and psychological needs as identified by the comprehensive assessment. The comprehensive care plan will be reviewed and revised by the Interdisciplinary Team on a quarterly basis at minimum and on an ongoing basis to reflect changes in resident status. Review of Resident #4's medical record occurred on all days of survey. The record identified a diagnosis, dated 07/20/22, of nicotine dependence with withdrawal. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide food in a form to meet individual needs for 1 of 1 sampled resident with an order for ground meat (Resident #76). Failure to provide ground meat as ordered may result in reduced intakes and chewing/swallowing difficulties. Findings include: Review of Resident #76's medical record occurred on all days of survey. A physician's order, dated 08/29/23, stated, Regular diet, Regular texture, Thin consistency, Ground Meat. The resident's care plan also identified a regular diet with ground meat. Observation on 09/05/23 at 5:55 p.m. showed Resident #76 eating dinner in the dining room. Staff served the resident whole sausage links which were not chopped/ground. Observation on 09/06/23 at 5:47 p.m. showed Resident #76 eating dinner in the dining room. Staff served the resident a hamburger on a bun which was not chopped/ground. During an interview on the afternoon of 09/07/23, an administrative nurse (#1) identified Resident #76 is to have ground meats related to poor dentition.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to serve, prepare, and store food in a safe and sanitary manner for 1 of 1 kitchen. Failure to label and date food with the expiration date, discard expired food, and ensure dishware and food is free from dust/debris increased the risk for contamination and has the potential to result in foodborne illness to residents, staff, and visitors. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Dietary Services occurred on 09/06/23. This undated policy stated, . food/leftovers must be dated, labeled, covered . toxic cleaning materials must be stored and used in such a manner as not to contaminate food . stored in a separate room . Observationsof the kitchen occurred on 09/05/23 at 1:54 p.m. and showed the following: - One package of turkey and ham with an expiration date of 8/24/23. - One undated package of cooked chicken. - One undated, unlabeled, and uncovered container of a custard dessert. - One undated and uncovered container of pudding. - One undated container of cooked carrots. - One undated open…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and review of facility policy, the facility failed to follow standards of infection control for 2 of 7 sampled residents (Resident #6 and #14) observed while receiving toileting assistance. Failure to follow infection control practices regarding hand hygiene during cares has the potential for transmission of communicable diseases and infections to residents, staff, and visitors. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Infection Control - Hand Hygiene occurred on 09/07/23. This policy, dated July 2023, stated, . The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid State Operations Manual indicates that hand hygiene should be performed . Before and after assisting a resident with personal cares . before and after assisting a resident with toileting . after removing gloves . The use of gloves does not replace handwashing/hand hygiene. - Observation on 09/05/23 at 3:37 p.m. showed a certified nurse aide (CNA) (#3) assist Resident #14 with toileting. Resident #14 placed her left hand on the toilet riser to lower herself onto and off the toilet. The CNA (#3) provided…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
BELZER, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/26/2005
BJORNSTAD, RANDINAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2014
FARBO, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2010
GIBBENS, MICHELLEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/26/2020
PETERS, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2012
WESTLIND, GREGORYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/26/2005
WOLSKY, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/21/2008
BUCHER, BENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2015
LARSON, TAMMYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/01/2008
GEHRTZ, JENNAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/14/2024
PETERSON, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/01/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

What families pay in ND

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the North Dakota Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in North Dakota
$11,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,304/mo
Nursing home (private)
$4,729/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 355068. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-14, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next